Jump to content

Why did they bring up succession order?


Ser Meryn Frey

Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, Lord Freddy Blackfyre said:

Are we forgetting that in the books Daenarys has already got pregnant an had a miscarriage when she is lost in the sea of grass in Dance of Dragons? 

Nothing of the sort happened on the show though, so yeah I would imagine we have! I also don't think it's actually confirmed in the books that that's what happened, it's merely a (very) popular interpretation - Dany herself certainly doesn't seem to think that this happened.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Mikkel said:

Nothing of the sort happened on the show though, so yeah I would imagine we have! I also don't think it's actually confirmed in the books that that's what happened, it's merely a (very) popular interpretation - Dany herself certainly doesn't seem to think that this happened.

IIRC she was confused, she didn't remember when was her last period

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Lord Freddy Blackfyre said:

Are we forgetting that in the books Daenarys has already got pregnant an had a miscarriage when she is lost in the sea of grass in Dance of Dragons? 

Multiple things here:

  • book!Dany's reason for believing she can't have babies is not that she can't get pregnant, but that she can't "bear a living child". So a miscarriage wouldn't change that.
  • book!Dany's belief that she can't have babies seems to be entirely based on Mirri's "prophecy", which I think she's completely misinterpreted.
  • show!Dany didn't have a miscarriage.
  • show!Mirri's prophecy left out the line about a child anyway.

So, I think that's a red herring in the books, and even if I'm wrong, it's probably not relevant to the show.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As others have mentioned they forshadowed children to Jon and Danny.  

Also, when Jon called Danny his Queen the implication on her face was she (excitedly) took it to mean marriage at first.  Given the blood requirement of some magic she and/or he may need to die in order for their child to be born and defeat the Night's King.  In otherword's a sacrfice to defeat the King which also results in a child is how I'm reading it (though could easily be wrong).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/20/2017 at 11:37 PM, Slugabed said:

OK, so all this talk about whether or not Dany can have children, I'm left wondering about Jon the Wight. I don't know if this has been discussed elsewhere, but I think it's kind of relevant here. Can the undead even make babies?

Pretty sure Jon isn't a wight. 

White Walkers ≠ Red Priests. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/20/2017 at 11:44 PM, falcotron said:

According to GRRM, book!Jon is a "fire wight" like Beric, and Beric has no blood flowing through his veins, which implies pretty strongly that book!Jon can't make babies.

Can you tell me where in the books this is, because I can't find it, nor does the wiki make any mention of a fire wight, nor anything remotely about no blood in their veins. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, ShadowKitteh said:

Pretty sure Jon isn't a wight. 

White Walkers ≠ Red Priests. 

Of course he's not the same kind of wight that the White Walkers raise. But GRRM likes to use the word "wight" to talk about all the undead in ASoIaF even if in-universe it's only been used for the ice zombies, so whether Jon is a wight or not is just arguing over arbitrary definitions.

Anyway, whether you want to say Jon or Beric is a "fire wight", or some other thing that isn't a kind of wight at all, they're clearly something weird that died and came back, and just as clearly they're not identical to "ice wights". Beric still talks and thinks like Beric, isn't subject to any kind of control by Thoros, didn't shatter when Thoros died, etc.

Meanwhile, there is some reason to believe that "fire wights" can't have sex, based on two statements by GRRM, but it probably doesn't apply to the show, only the books.

There's no reason at all to believe that "fire wights" can't make babies if they do have sex.

27 minutes ago, ShadowKitteh said:

Can you tell me where in the books this is, because I can't find it, nor does the wiki make any mention of a fire wight, nor anything remotely about no blood in their veins. 

It's obviously not in the books, because in the books, Jon is still alive. Sure, we all know he's going to die of his wounds, and then come back in some way, but it hasn't happened  yet.

it's in an interview, which I believe someone else quoted further up in this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Targaryen Dynasty needs to continue, unless they become extinct, which means Daenerys plot was all for nothing :( And since Jon Snow is confirmed to be Jon Targaryen? He can continue the line - whether his resurrection affected his fertility is hard to know. Since Daenerys believes she is infertile, and Jon Snow is "fire-wight" the only plausible way to resolve this is to have them accidentally make a child.

For the Targaryen line to continue, Jon must conceive a child. And aside from Daenerys, who else is eligible to become his baby's mother? With seven episodes left until the finale, Daenerys is the only logical choice. There is no time to introduce another female character in regards to courtship.

I'm 99% sure Jon and Daenerys will have sex before he is told who his real father is, and the possibility that Daenerys will fall pregnant is high. This would bypass the whole incest-question. We don't know how Jon would react to the news that Daenerys is his aunt. And since they already had sex, and she fell pregnant, it would not raise the question on whether or not Jon would continue the relationship. His honor would force him into a marriage, and he seems to be falling in love. So it might not be that forced.

Does this make sense?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dawn of Fyre said:

The Targaryen Dynasty needs to continue, unless they become extinct, which means Daenerys plot was all for nothing :( And since Jon Snow is confirmed to be Jon Targaryen? He can continue the line - whether his resurrection affected his fertility is hard to know. Since Daenerys believes she is infertile, and Jon Snow is "fire-wight" the only plausible way to resolve this is to have them accidentally make a child.

For the Targaryen line to continue, Jon must conceive a child. And aside from Daenerys, who else is eligible to become his baby's mother? With seven episodes left until the finale, Daenerys is the only logical choice. There is no time to introduce another female character in regards to courtship.

I'm 99% sure Jon and Daenerys will have sex before he is told who his real father is, and the possibility that Daenerys will fall pregnant is high. This would bypass the whole incest-question. We don't know how Jon would react to the news that Daenerys is his aunt. And since they already had sex, and she fell pregnant, it would not raise the question on whether or not Jon would continue the relationship. His honor would force him into a marriage, and he seems to be falling in love. So it might not be that forced.

Does this make sense?

I'm with you 100% here! I'm not sure how he'd react either BUT he seems pretty smitten so I can't see him bailing on his lover and queen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Dawn of Fyre said:

Does this make sense?

Yes, it makes sense. And I think it's all pretty likely, although maybe not 99%. I do think Dany will say no to Jon's morning-after proposal if it happens, only to say yes an episode later. And I think there's a good chance that either Jon dies shortly after the wedding or Dany dies in childbirth. But otherwise, your version seems pretty likely.

But a few nits to pick:

First, I don't think the incest issue is an issue at all. There is no social stigma in Westeros—or almost any real-world medieval society—against non-immediate-family incest. When you can only marry within your social level and your region there just aren't too many other choices, so nobles marry their cousins pretty often, and nobody thinks there's anything weird about it. And if the viewers care—well, the viewers already know Dany is Jon's aunt, so it doesn't matter when the characters find out.

Also, you're basically saying the Targ line can only continue through Jon rather than Dany because Dany's infertile, but then concluding that it'll be Jon with Dany. That doesn't make sense unless you assume that Jon's magic sperm is needed to overcome her magic infertility, which isn't totally impossible, but it's a pretty big assumption. And Dany has a lot more appropriate options than Jon (he's got, what, Brienne, Ellaria, and Tyene as possible alternatives?). But I think Dany and Jon are still the most likely, so this doesn't matter much.

One last thing: I hope they can do something interesting with the fact that Jon proposing to a woman because he slept with her is exactly the same thing as Robb's big mistake, but this time it's not a mistake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, falcotron said:

Yes, it makes sense. And I think it's all pretty likely, although maybe not 99%. I do think Dany will say no to Jon's morning-after proposal if it happens, only to say yes an episode later. And I think there's a good chance that either Jon dies shortly after the wedding or Dany dies in childbirth. But otherwise, your version seems pretty likely.

But a few nits to pick:

First, I don't think the incest issue is an issue at all. There is no social stigma in Westeros—or almost any real-world medieval society—against non-immediate-family incest. When you can only marry within your social level and your region there just aren't too many other choices, so nobles marry their cousins pretty often, and nobody thinks there's anything weird about it. And if the viewers care—well, the viewers already know Dany is Jon's aunt, so it doesn't matter when the characters find out.

Also, you're basically saying the Targ line can only continue through Jon rather than Dany because Dany's infertile, but then concluding that it'll be Jon with Dany. That doesn't make sense unless you assume that Jon's magic sperm is needed to overcome her magic infertility, which isn't totally impossible, but it's a pretty big assumption. And Dany has a lot more appropriate options than Jon (he's got, what, Brienne, Ellaria, and Tyene as possible alternatives?). But I think Dany and Jon are still the most likely, so this doesn't matter much.

One last thing: I hope they can do something interesting with the fact that Jon proposing to a woman because he slept with her is exactly the same thing as Robb's big mistake, but this time it's not a mistake.

Yes, I should have mentioned that. That is the most likely scenario to by-pass the infertility she suffered through magic. And with Daenerys having a child with another man, I'm pretty sure the child would inherit the father's surname, unless Daenerys forgoes tradition and perhaps law? Anyway, a male heir born from a male Tagraryen would be the best case scenario for House Targaryen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/22/2017 at 0:30 PM, Snormund said:

I'm beyond sick of this show trying to push an aunt fucking her own nephew as romantic. It's sickening. 

I think those looks Daenerys gave Jon when he said he doesn't like doing what he's good at (ie killing, just like Rhaegar) and the way she reacted when Drogon let him pat his nose, were lightbulb moments for her but she hasn't connected the dots yet. She seems to be confused by her feelings so she has kept her actions toward him protective and maternal, not sensual, hence the hand holding and not a kiss.

I think (and hope) it's all leading up to a strong family bond once Jon's parentage is revealed, not an incestuous relationship.

Jon, however, is definitely smitten but being the practical character he is, will snap out of it as soon as he discovers he's her nephew.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, falcotron said:

One last thing: I hope they can do something interesting with the fact that Jon proposing to a woman because he slept with her is exactly the same thing as Robb's big mistake, but this time it's not a mistake.

That would be interesting, but Robb's mistake was not in the proposing itself - that bit was a bit naive, but also honorable - the mistake was in reneging on an already established marriage contract with Walder Frey. Jon has no such contract hanging over his head.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Quote

I don't think the incest issue is an issue at all. There is no social stigma in Westeros—or almost any real-world medieval society—against non-immediate-family inces


Agreed, the whole "Incest, ewww"-argument is just a scapegoat for people who simply doesn't want Jon and Dany together. There are many reasons why it's actually OK for them to be together in the show, while the only real reason is that sexual relations between aunts and nephews *today* is somewhat looked down upon, but it's actually legal in many western countries.
Sexual relations between non-immediate family members in the setting of GoT (medieval) was actually nothing strange at all.
Sexual relations between immediate family members (siblings, parents, chilldren, grand children/parents) was frowned upon however, as it is today. Luckily for Jon and Dany, they are not immediate family members. Cersei and Jamie tried to keep their relationship a secret at first *because* they where immediate family members.

Another argument why it's OK for them to be together is because they quite simply don't know that they are related. For all Jon and Dany know, they are two monarchs of the same age, who are attracted to each other and who have a lot of things in common and a lot of qualities that they like and respect about the other person. From their perspective, it would be totally normal for them to have a romantic relationship.
Now, we don't really know how either of them would react if someone told them before they fell in love, but by this stage they are firmly in love with each other. My guess is that they would be slightly off-put by the fact (not to mention surprised) when they are told at first, but then will quickly come to the conclusion that it doesn't matter, nor that they care, especially not if Daenerys is pregnant at that point.

A third argument is the whole "Targaryens have done it for centuries, it's normal for them". From a modern standpoint this doesn't make it OK, but this is fictional fantasy. Targaryens married siblings because they wanted to keep their bloodlines pure so they could continue to handle their dragons. I'm not a bookreader, so please correct me if I'm wrong, but I read somewhere that when Targaryen women where impregnated by non-Targaryen men, then the children historically had a much larger chance of being malformed and sickly?

Also, the comparison between Robb and Jon halters quite abit:
Robb was already pledged to another woman when he married Talissa instead, he broke his promise. He put love before duty, and suffered for it.
Jon on the other hand, is essentially single, pledged to no one. By giving in to his feelings for Daenerys, he doesn't put love before duty. Instead he accepts the fact that they aren't mutually exclusive. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, MinscS2 said:

I'm not a bookreader, so please correct me if I'm wrong, but I read somewhere that when Targaryen women where impregnated by non-Targaryen men, then the children historically had a much larger chance of being malformed and sickly.

Pretty sure that the books don't have anything like this, if anything the best of the Targaryens were those who had "input" so to speak from outside of the Targaryen bloodline, and who didn't look traditionally Targaryen (Baelor Breakspear being the most notable example).

But I wouldn't be surprised if the "malformed and sickly" idea was used as some kind of propaganda to continue the incest thing.

5 minutes ago, MinscS2 said:

Sexual relations between non-immediate family members in the setting of GoT (medieval) was actually nothing strange at all.

Well you're not wrong in principle, but I think that - outside of House Brotherfucker and House Inbred - aunt/nephew would be considered too close for comfort, at least in Westeros (real European history is another matter). I could be wrong, so feel free to correct me, but I don't think we have any examples of that kind of marriage (uncle/niece would also quality as it's the same relation just in reverse). Euron/Victarion having obscene fantasies about Yara/Asha don't count, as those guys have already gone beyond the pale on multiple occasions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, MinscS2 said:

 


Agreed, the whole "Incest, ewww"-argument is just a scapegoat for people who simply doesn't want Jon and Dany together. There are many reasons why it's actually OK for them to be together in the show, while the only real reason is that sexual relations between aunts and nephews *today* is somewhat looked down upon, but it's actually legal in many western countries.
Sexual relations between non-immediate family members in the setting of GoT (medieval) was actually nothing strange at all.
Sexual relations between immediate family members (siblings, parents, chilldren, grand children/parents) was frowned upon however, as it is today. Luckily for Jon and Dany, they are not immediate family members. Cersei and Jamie tried to keep their relationship a secret at first *because* they where immediate family members.

Another argument why it's OK for them to be together is because they quite simply don't know that they are related. For all Jon and Dany know, they are two monarchs of the same age, who are attracted to each other and who have a lot of things in common and a lot of qualities that they like and respect about the other person. From their perspective, it would be totally normal for them to have a romantic relationship.
Now, we don't really know how either of them would react if someone told them before they fell in love, but by this stage they are firmly in love with each other. My guess is that they would be slightly off-put by the fact (not to mention surprised) when they are told at first, but then will quickly come to the conclusion that it doesn't matter, nor that they care.

A third argument is the whole "Targaryens have done it for centuries, it's normal for them". From a modern standpoint this doesn't make it OK, but this is fictional fantasy. Targaryens married siblings because they wanted to keep their bloodlines pure so they could continue to handle their dragons. I'm not a bookreader, so please correct me if I'm wrong, but I read somewhere that when Targaryen women where impregnated by non-Targaryen men, then the children historically had a much larger chance of being malformed and sickly.

The Robb and Jon comparison halters slightly.
Robb was already pledged to another woman when he married Talissa instead, he broke his promise. He put love before duty, and suffered for it.
Jon on the other hand, is essentially single. By giving in to his feelings for Daenerys, he doesn't put love before duty. Instead he accepts the fact that they aren't mutually exclusive. 

Two words: Boat Sex. :P

Two more words: Accidental Impregnation. :o 

Two words: Shotgun Wedding. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Dawn of Fyre said:

Yes, I should have mentioned that. That is the most likely scenario to by-pass the infertility she suffered through magic.

I don't think she does suffer infertility through magic. The only good reason we have to believe it is Mirri's prophecy, which (a) doesn't even include anything about her having kids, that's only in the books; (b) isn't actually a prophecy, it's just a prognosis that Drogo isn't coming out of his coma dressed up in flowery words, and (c) doesn't actually predict that Dany can't have kids anyway, even if you take the book version and take it as a prophecy.

Meanwhile, I don't see why being raised from the dead should give Jon magic sperm. King's blood giving him magic sperm might fit in with other stuff we've learned, but in that case, Jon's not the only candidate (although Gendry might have problems performing if you give him Melisandre leech flashbacks…).

11 minutes ago, Dawn of Fyre said:

And with Daenerys having a child with another man, I'm pretty sure the child would inherit the father's surname, unless Daenerys forgoes tradition and perhaps law? Anyway, a male heir born from a male Tagraryen would be the best case scenario for House Targaryen.

I think the tradition is that the child would be a Targaryen, and the father might even as well. It's never happened with a regnant Queen, but for Ladies, I'm pretty sure there are examples in the books' appendices, and there may even be one in the main text (in the part where Bran is dealing with the Hornwood widow), although I'm not sure about that. And yeah, that's the books, but this isn't the kind of thing D&D have any reason to change.

This kind of thing also happens in the real world.* Different countries have different rules (and change them over time, too), but, for example, royal descendants of Queen Elizabeth II are of House Windsor, after her, not Mountbatten, after Philip, and non-royal descendants get to choose between the surnames Windsor or Mountbatten-Windsor, but never Mountbatten.

---

* It seems to be more regular in Westeros. I suspect this is part of a set of traditions designed to discourage one person from inheriting two independent titles whenever possible. Because that seems to be very rare in Westeros, except in exceptional cases (and the one time it happens in-story, they immediately split off one of the titles by giving it to a second son), but it happens all the time in Europe. But as far as I know, GRRM has never talked about this, so this whole footnote is speculation.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...